Thursday, July 23, 2009

Back in April I issued a challenge to all Nationals starters: can you beat Shawn Hill in 2009 VORP?

VORP, or value over replacement player, is a Baseball Prospectus stat the counts the number of runs--or runs prevented, in the case of a pitcher--that a player provides over the course of a season over what the typical AAA fill-in would provide.

Shawn Hill finished the season at 0.2 VORP in 3 starts and 12 innings.

Basically, it's a lock that any pitcher getting regular work should exceed Hill's VORP, because it's a counting stat that adds up based on playing time. Losing the Hill in VORP would be like losing out to Roger Bernadina in RBI. All you have to do is provide anything at all over replacement-level value, and it's a shoo-in.

But Olsen did it. He finished the year at -6.4 VORP.

Incidentally, he's the third Nationals starter to lose the Shawn Hill challenge. Daniel Cabrera ended the year a stunning -14.9 VORP. Ross Detwiler may get another shot, but for now he's at -5.6.

19 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Steven,

This obsession is just stupid. The facts are Olsen will pitch again and has value. Hill has none.

Also don't look now, (why start now anyway, I know you just watch your screen at games anyway), but hard work in pre-game drills is starting to have a positive effect on the defense. Yea, the personal still sucks and will not ever be great on defense with the Dunn, Willingham, Guzman and Belliard but they are at least starting to make standard plays and even some nice plays. Better sign is Zimm and Nick are playing up to their potential. Imagine if Acta had spent spring training working them hard! I like the approach Rig has with letting starting pitching work things out and bringing in the hot had from the pen not the rote Acta use of the pen. Acta NEVER would have used Bergman in that spot. I know you will never see it....but change is happening.

Oh and if you do not understand the significant difference in work Rigs has made compared to Acta then you need to read the Craig S interview from ESPN Zone. Clearly Rigs has increased the focus on Defense from Acta's country club.

Thje problem with "replacement value" is that it assumes, to some degree, that you can identify the guy(s) not on a major league roster who will come in and perform best of those available (or at least just a tick below those guys otherwise worthy of a spot in a major leaguie rotation). You can't say that you can grab any old successful AAA pitcher and you will get VORP of zero. You're quite likely to get a VORP of less than zero.

And with Shawn Hill, the reality is that someone not on a major league roster would have had to pitch the other 188 or so innings you need from that spot in the rotation, so the return from using Shawn Hill for his 12 innings quite likely might be a spot in the rotation with a negative VORP (since the replacement might very well pitch worse than zero VORP). It all depends on how lucky or good you are at identifying the best guy on the scrap heap when Hill goes down.

You have said yourself if Olsen has his 91 MPH fastball instead of the 87 MPH fastball then it is a different story. We saw that with starts 1 and 2 after the first DL trip. I take the bet, his Lat will heal and it may well have been an issue into last year when his fastball dropped. He will rehab it correctly now that it is diagnosed. Note how much better the DL process is working now that Jimbo is not running the relationships here and we have solid medical process and strength and conditioning staff here.

Oh Come on Steven....VORP for pitches does not take into account Errors/Defense Stats?????!?

Defense more than anything else that hurts a Nats pitcher with the WORST defense in baseball (under Acta).....why bother with this stat for the first half? Yes general trend for 2009 Olsen is unchanged but to sharpen your pencil on VORP for Nats pitching in the first half without looking at the defense seems stupid and slavish at best.

John--it's set at the level that a competent GM can get a player at minimal cost. So either you trade a fungible commodity or pay a minimal salary. It's not a "guy off the street." But replacement-level value for a competent GM is readily available at minimal cost.

This is the reason the concept is important. Too many fans (and GMs, frankly) stick too long with the devil they know because they underestimate how easily and widely available replacement value is.

@JayB--you think stats are dumb and useless, but now you're the expert on the relative merits of VORP? Please.

Olsen 2009 with 87 MPH fastball sucks....Olsen 2009 with 91MPH fastball looked fine to me. I have learned a lot about stats from you and I think some of the stuff is fine but making value judgment about talent based on Pitching VORP in the first half of Nats season and Defense IS stupid. I think your logical and less jaded side, the one that does not hate Olsen as a "papered rich kid" would see that.

Please don't make me find the quote from you...it is paraphrased and you know it is out there.

I totally understand you hatred for Olsen- I'm still that way with Wily Mo Pena. I still want to find a way to blame every loss in 2009 on WMP. I think that if Wily Mo never exists, Olsen is not on this team, so even Olsen is WMP's fault. My logic is objective and flawless...

If you can count Hill's contribution to the 12 innings he was healthy then shouldn't you give Olsen the same courtesy? Sure in reality its hard to know when he was hurt, but he def. looked hurt before he went on the D.L. the first time and when he came back. There should be some consideration for that fact. Also his season wasn't ended because of inefftiveness like Cabrera's and Detwiler's. had he not gotten injured again he could have raised that VORP considerably.

Hey, can't we all just get along? Ha! Listen I see what both y'all are talking about but the trueist factor is the fact that he's on the Nationals. He's an asset. What can this asset do for us or garner us in the future? This player had to have been hurt coming into play for the Nats IMO. (blame that one on...you know who) But that all doesn't matter now, his stats don't matter. Apple = Stats when we can determine his velocity before being hurt and Oranges = Stats after he was hurt. Olsen isn't a funny loving or lovable character, eh. True...but let's get him heathly. Let's get he's stats up and then ship him out so we can have peace in the FJB...Shawn Hill was home grown. he and all the kids that come through The Nats system are going to garner our best interests. Olsen Smolsen. If by some act of God Olsen becomes the next Smoltz or what ever lets always hope, however we feel about him, that his value is up up up. Than we can get value on the field or value in another needed player. Lets hope Olsen = the next best SS...heck we'll give them Guzzy and Hernia with that package, eh.... Love your site Steve, always keeps us on our toes or is that you on our toes.. ha!

He did gain a bit after the DL. In his first start after getting off the DL, his fastball averaged 89.2 and topped out at 91.6. In his second, he averaged 88.85 and topped at once way up at 93.5 (weird outlier).

That's 2.5 mph average off his effective average FB speed of 91-92 mph, even when his velocity was supposedly "back."

And Olsen's injury is a torn labrum, not just a lat. Plus, he's shown signs of being hurt since Girardi rode him as a rookie in 2006.

I've been wrong about many things, but Scott Olsen hasn't been one of them.

If you picked five starting pitchers who could be had at minimal cost (e.g., not on a major league roster and obtainable for not much), those five guys would not have all VORPs at zero, or even around zero. Some would probably do better, some would do worse. Replacement level performance is easier identified after the fact.

So it doesn't work to say that "we're all set with our #5 pitcher because Shawn Hill will give us .1 VORP in 12 innings and then, eh, we'll grab someone who will give us VORP at zero for the rest of the season.

I'm no Olsen fan, but it's not so scientific to identify a replacement level of performance in advance.

Yes you have been right in 2009 about Olsen. His first two starts after the DL time speak to the effectiveness of his improved MPH fastball regardless off averages he was effective with it. Did you watch the games?

re: the podcast. I had to flake on Monday night because of work, and the next time Brian and I were both free was tomorrow. So we'll do the trade deadline special then, and then I think probably catch up with our usual Modnay night podcast a couple days later.

Glad someone's enjoying it! I certainly have fun doing it.

@John--You're obviously right. The point isn't that GMs should be clairvoyant. It woldn't be fair to say that no team should ever have a below repalcement performer ever.

The point is that they shouldn't settle for a level of production that is below a certain level that is available at minimal cost, either in trades or signings.

There have been fascinating debates abut the best way to calculate replacement level value for each position, starters v. relievers, etc.

I don't have the chops to say one way or another which theory is the best, but the concept is sound.

Agreed, LOVE the pod-casting.....Can you please talk about the changes we are starting to see in a Rigs vs. Acta team. Pitching and bull pen decisions, lineups, aggressive base running, Defense and fundamentals all seem to be starting to show small differences from Acta. Not all are paying off yet but change is there and Change was the only real hope for the move anyway. The roster should be able to win at a .375 pace at least.